Sustainable Economics

Thursday, April 21, 2016

With the US presidential elections
in full swing this year and with the candidacy of Bernie Sanders for the
Democratic nomination, the argument over the federal minimum wage issue is now
penetrating the public sphere like never before. Yes, we did have the fast-food workers stage
protests in the past, demanding that they be paid a living wage. Now however, with Bernie Sanders taking the
issue on the campaign trail, it has become hard to ignore. Unfortunately, the argument has become
largely about ethics versus economics, with the ethical argument in favor of a
higher minimum wage, while the economic argument is largely used to oppose the
idea, arguing that it would lead to massive job loss, inflation, loss of
economic competitiveness as well as other typical arguments which were
typically used over the past decades.

While many of the economic arguments against raising the minimum wage may
have made perfect sense a few decades ago, in case many of us have not noticed,
we no longer live in the same economic environment we did for the past few
decades. Changes in the structure of the
economy, in large part brought about by globalization made most of those arguments largely irrelevant. One of the changes that took place has to do
with inflation. Inflation stopped being
a major problem in the past decade and a half or so, because the influx of much
cheaper goods coming from places like China, where labor and environmental
protection costs are much lower. Since
the 2008 crisis, deflation has become the bigger concern, not just in the
United States, but in the entire developed world, with even developing nations
such as in Eastern Europe and China experiencing a dramatic shift towards a
lower inflation environment. While the
US Federal Reserve target rate is an average of 2%, since 2014, inflation has
been hovering consistently under 1%.
2011 was the last year that inflation was above 2%. Needless to say therefore that inflation is
not really a huge problem right now, therefore a hike in the minimum wage would
not only be safe, but in fact beneficial, because it would be just the thing to
help the economy get back to the 2% inflation goal.

As far as job loss issue goes, it is
certainly true that higher wages would have an initial effect of causing some
job destruction. At the same time
however, we should keep in mind that there would also be the secondary
effect which I believe in this case would be more powerful than the primary
effect and the secondary effect would involve job creation through an increase
in consumer demand. In fact, our current
dilemma stems from a lack of consumer demand, which was also caused by the
effects of globalization. Wages have
risen dramatically in China for instance, taking hundreds of millions of people
out of poverty. In the US however the
effect of globalization is opposite.
Aside from the top 5% of households by income, pretty much all income
groups have experienced stagnation or a steep decline in real household income.

As we can see, aside from the top
five percent of households by income, most households have either stagnated or
are experiencing a decline in real income, which means that the US consumer’s
ability to increase consumption is in decline for over a decade and a half
already. The consumer debt bubble carried
the consumer after 2000, until that bubble burst, and since then the consumer
is being carried by the low interest rate environment, which is in effect
reducing the consumer’s interest burden, freeing up income to increase
consumption. The effects of the low interest rates are
also starting to wear off, because it is a one-time boost, which cannot be
replicated given that interest rates cannot go further down from here. An increase in the minimum wage is therefore
the only viable solution going forward, because there is no other viable way of boosting the consumer’s ability to continue increasing spending. In fact, if nothing is done, consumer spending
which makes up about 70% of the economy may end up contracting back to 2000
levels, causing a very nasty period of sustained economic contraction in the
process. For this reason, the economic
argument which currently mainly supports the idea that raising the minimum wage
is a bad thing, which will cause unwanted inflation and job loss is
flawed. The current path may in fact
lead to a much greater loss of jobs and the economy could get permanently stuck
in a deflationary cycle, as seems to be the case with Japan for decades now,
and Europe as well for the past few years, unless we start seeing some income
growth for the other 95% of households, not just the top 5%. A sure way to accomplish this would be to introduce a multi-year plan to get us to a much higher minimum wage compared with today.

Monday, January 11, 2016

It has been eleven days since the attacks took place, and so far, if we are to sum up the reaction of the mainstream left, one word is enough to sum it up: Shameful!

At first, we had the first days of the attempted cover-up. The initial police report did not contain any reference to the sexual assaults, instead maintained that the night went by relatively incident free. Only on the fourth did the story break, with right-leaning Breitbart leading the charge. That same evening German state broadcaster ZDF failed to make any mention of the incidents, even though by that time Breitbart was already pointing out that as many as ninety women were sexually assaulted. ZDF later apologized, but the one thing that remains clear is that there was a definite desire to bury the story. Only on the fifth day did the mainstream media pick up the story, not because it wanted to, but because it was caught in offside by the sheer size of it. In other words, it sank in that this one cannot be swept under the carpet and any continued attempt to do so, will only serve to further discredit them.

The German government was also forced to address the issue on the fifth day. Three days later, the fall guy was identified. It was to be Cologne's police chief. He was accused of mishandling security and withholding information on the perpetrators. Cologne's pro-migrant mayor came out soon after, claiming that she was misled by the police reports, thus her ridiculous reactions. Merkel repeatedly came out demanding that the criminals be brought to justice, but no word on what should be done with the "sponsor" of the criminals. She made it a point to highlight how personally affected she was by the attacks. That must be true indeed, because just before the attacks, we learned from Bild that the German government was actively suppressing information in regards to migrant criminal acts. So, yes indeed, she is personally very affected by the fact that this time, it was just too big to be swept under the carpet, therefore the negative consequences of her imposed experiment can no longer be denied. These negative consequences amount to her and her government breaking the most sacred social contract which is one of the main foundations of our society. It is the contract by which the masses relinquish the right to violence in favor of the state, in return for the state providing a high degree of security. Any policy which knowingly does the opposite and endangers the public, is a breach of that contract.

The shameful reaction of feminists.

With over 200 women having been sexually assaulted in Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, Dusseldorf Frankfurt and Berlin as a direct result of past and present migrant policies, one would think that at the very least women's movements would jump firmly into the corner of the victims, as well as demanding policies which will protect women in their community from being exposed to such barbarous acts. They might have even been able to protect women's rights and remain in favor of migration, if they would have come out in favor of shifting the granting of asylum from the overwhelmingly young male invasion of Europe, to perhaps following the Canadian model and only granting asylum to those applying from the first safe country, such as Lebanon or Turkey. If we think about it, such a policy would have more humanitarian weight, because governments in Europe would be able to chose the most vulnerable, such as families, or women with children, or even orphaned children, instead of granting asylum to hordes of young men, which could better fend for themselves.

Early on however, it became clear that multi-kulti is more important to the feminist movement than the safety of women. That was made clear by the very first protest held in Cologne, where mainly women marched with the overall theme of "No to sexism, no to racism". The racism reference has no connection to any possible racial dimensions that the attacks may have had, given that the perps were overwhelmingly of color and it seems the overwhelming majority of victims were white. It was a reference to anyone who opposes the current trend of mass migration, which brought the perps to Germany. In effect, the protest turned into more of a pro-immigration march then a denouncement of the events and policies that led to over 200 women being sexually assaulted by a mob.

In other words, they are saying that they denounce the attacks, but they are not only in favor of the policies that led to the attacks, but they feel that anyone who is opposed to the current open borders policies which brought the attackers to Germany, is a "racist". Of course, it does not seem that any of them may have taken a time to actually think about the victims when it comes to making such correlations.

I will not by any means attempt to speak in the name of the victims, or pretend to know where most of them stand on the issue. But given that at this point we have roughly 200 victims of sexual assault in Cologne alone and we had similar occurrences in many German cities and elsewhere in Europe, with a connection to recent or past weaves of asylum seekers and other migrants, I think it is a good bet to assume that at least some of the women who experienced these assaults on that night, will feel that the current open border policy is to blame for their ordeal. Should we label them as racist now because of it? The feminist voices we have heard from so far most certainly seem to think that we should. I do not think that it is up to me to condemn this vile attitude. I may find it vile, but for all I know, maybe all the women who were assaulted thus far may agree with their position. What I do take issue with is the way they have portrayed European men, because after all, I am a European man.

The prevalent argument for doing so, seems to be the thesis that there is really no difference between the behavior of the newcomer asylum seekers and the general male European population. After all, the argument goes as presented by feminist activists such as Anne Wizorek..

"The problem of sexism and sexual violence, especially against women, has already been there and has nothing to do with any people who come here as refugees or are growing up as people of color in general,"

In other words, if I am to understand this argument correctly, because sexual abuse already occurs in out society, the fact that the newcomers committed this mass-assault on women, in no way changes German society. Any attempt to claim that it does is racially motivated. If we dare to claim that these young men who come from a different society with a different set of values behave any different from any of us, we are racists.

First of all, I have to agree with Anne Wizorek, there are plenty of sexual assaults committed by European men. In fact, in Denmark for instance, about 500 cases of rape are reported every year. Putting aside right-wing claims that a disproportionate number of rapes in Denmark are committed by Muslim men or other foreigners, it means that at least 500 women per year are raped in Denmark by a European man. That means that over a lifetime approximately one in one hundred women can be expected to report a rape over their lifetime. Argument goes that the majority of rapes are in fact not reported, therefore the numbers can be much higher than that. So, yes, there is no denying the fact that Muslim men are by no means the only ones who will sexually assault women.

Having said all that, there is a huge difference when it comes to the attitude of most Western men towards women and how most Muslim men see things. For one thing, we were not raised to believe that our god approves of sexually molesting women who are not of the same religion as we are. Aside from that, in our society, women have not only the right but also enough trust to display a high degree of sexual freedom, in terms of the way they dress and behave, without expecting to be sexually molested. They expect to be able to flirt and then demand an end to it. They expect to go as far as they want with a partner and demand an end to it at any point. And rightfully so. It is their right!

The fact that it still happens occasionally that a man ignores the right of a woman to say no at any point, any time, and under any circumstance is unfortunate. But realistically speaking, I doubt that society will ever reach the point of completely eradicating sexual abuse. But my point is that compared with men in most societies, Western men do tend to show a great deal of restraint, and furthermore most of us condemn those who do not. Comparisons such as these in regards to events such as Oktoberfest;

"Sexual assaults and even rape happen every year at big events like Oktoberfest. 'The way to the toilet alone is like running the gauntlet: within 50 feet, you can be sure to tally three hugs from drunken strangers, two pats on the ass, someone looking up your dirndl, and some beer purposely splashed right down your cleavage,' wrote Karoline Beisel and Beate Wild in 2011, in the Süddeutsche Zeitung. An average of ten reported rapes take place each year at Oktoberfest. The estimated number of unreported cases is 200." (link)

which try to draw a parallel that equates the behavior of the average European man to that of the average man raised in the Middle East or North Africa, is insulting to say the least. It is insulting, because the reality of events such as Oktoberfest is that the experience of most women at the event is such that they would be willing to return next year as well. The crimes and misbehavior by the men towards women, is obviously rare enough or benign enough that the vast majority of women feel safe enough to return and have fun. On the other hand, I think few women who passed through the area of Cologne where the assaults happened would chose to do so again, if they could go back in time, knowing what they now know.

Fact is that the feminist claims that the massive migration of people from a very different culture, where women's legal and cultural rights are nowhere near the point where it is in the Western world will not change the state of women's freedom in the Western world, is outright ridiculous and based on nothing but ideological belief. It did change to some extent already, with only a million people moving to Germany in one year. I think it is time to admit that Germany and the state of women's safety in society will not be the same ever again if the current open borders policy will continue for much longer. As I said in the past, a shrinking population will not assimilate a growing population. It is the growing population which gradually tends to assert itself culturally, even before it becomes the majority population, because it is more energetic. With that, the cultural rights will go first, and then eventually, even the legal rights.

And if the women who call themselves feminists believe that they can have their globalist, multiculturalist ideological viewpoints validated, while at the same time pretending that they will be able to not only safeguard the current degree of freedoms, both legal and cultural, but also enhance them, they are absolutely wrong. It was already proven wrong. Even a clumsy attempt to sweep the evidence under the carpet and then the current attempt to whitewash the events, at the cost of throwing the victims under the buss, did not prevent the fact that women's cultural freedoms are already under attack from surfacing. All it did was to further undermine the trust of society in their authorities and the ideological dogma most German elites adhere to. It is also severely undermining the reputation of the feminist movement, because since all this happened, their only preoccupation seems to be the downplaying of what happened, by using comparisons which make them sound a lot less like feminist, women's rights advocacy movements and a lot more like anti-white-male, hate groups. If they hate us so much, perhaps they should take the time to contemplate the difference between the consequences of women allowing themselves the freedom to behave as they do within our society and what would happen to a woman which would do the same in a Middle Eastern or North African country. What would be the odds of not being molested and raped over and over again, until they would change their behavior? That is the difference between us and them, and pretending that this difference does not exist is a shameless insult!

I want to leave the reader on a more positive note, with one single feminist voice, which I thought was appropriate:

Tuesday, January 5, 2016

Thinking back to my dear departed dad, I think he was a rather primitive man, at least by the standards we hold to be ideal in our current society. He was nothing like us, sophisticated dudes these days. The events in Cologne, Germany from the past few days, where apparently a large group of mainly migrant asylum seekers decided to ring in the New Year by committing dozens of sexual assaults and other crimes in the town square, brought back a memory of a story my dad once told me from when he was a young man.

It was a summer day in my hometown in Romania when my dad was catching a bus from just outside of town, where people went swimming and fishing. On the bus, there was a father with two young girls who attracted the attention of a group of young men who were probably slightly intoxicated. They decided to show some similar affection to the young girls as the group of the roughly 1,000 young men in Cologne's central square did on New Year's to the local ladies passing by. The father immediately stood up of course and tried to defend his daughters. The group of hyenas wanted to gang up on him and teach him a lesson, but they immediately realized that a rather large group of passengers, especially fishermen also stood up and were ready to show the hyenas that it was not their territory after all. They acted like a group of protective German Shepherds. The group of hyenas responded by backing off, but also made sure to let the father know that they will pick up the issue once they got off the bus and the German Shepherds were no longer there.

But when they did get off the bus, to their surprise, so did all the German Shepherds, who according to my dad, did not know each other, did not communicate on the bus, yet they all knew what had to be done. The bus driver also knew what had to be done. He immediately parked the bus in a way that shielded the former passengers from the view of the rest of the street. Then the German Shepherds told the dad to take his daughters away and they turned their attention to the hyenas. They pinned them to the ground and went to work on them, mainly using the tips of their fishing rods as whips. It was primitive vigilante justice. No authorities were involved. Just a bunch of like-minded primitive men with a German Shepherd-like protective mentality. Knowing the Romanian authorities from back in those days, I would imagine if the hyenas would have gone to complain, they would have been in for another round at the police station, once the officers would have learned why the hyenas were stripped like zebras.

I am not like my father. I may have been something like that when I was growing up. But then I learned how to be civilized. I avoided violent confrontations on a few occasions once I grew up, even in a few cases which would have made my dad slightly ashamed of me if he would have learned of it. From his perspective, being a German Shepherd was something to be proud off. It was his idea of what it meant to be a man. Imagine the disappointment he would have felt learning that his only son was more of a puddle. And not just any poodle, but a highly domesticated docile one.

Heck, the last time I threw a punch was a decade ago, and even then it was due to the fact that I had no choice. I was in a club with two co-workers, one of which got very drunk. He must have done something to offend a group of young men, because at some point two of them came close to us and one of them started punching him. My other co-worker jumped to hold back the second guy, so I had no choice but to put an end to the pouncing on my drunk co-worker, so I got out of my chair and punched the attacker in the face. It was a pathetic punch! It most certainly was not anywhere near the potential power that my body could have produced. It was more like 25% of my full potential from back in those days. At the moment I thought I am in trouble, because evidently, I no longer had it in me. But to my surprise, the attacker backed off. He seemed terribly surprised, as if he never had the honor of being punched in the face before. It turns out, he was just another poodle, just like me, despite his initial apparent fierceness he displayed while attacking my drunk co-worker, who was just too drunk and too stuck between his chair and table to be able to get up and defend himself. As he started backing off, following my feeble punch, he seemed to be trying to mumble something with an expression of surprise and slight fright in his face. Then the German Shepherds did show up, in the form of the club's hired muscle and escorted the attacker out. That is the end of that story. To this day, I continue to ask myself whether there would have still been some German Shepherd instincts in me if the situation would have escalated. I am inclined to believe that I am probably a poodle, even though I for one am not very proud of it, unlike an increasing number of people among our society who seem to be convinced that it is the ideal.

It is not just me. Chances are that so are you, especially if you were raised in our sophisticated Western society. And evidently, so are the men of Cologne, Germany, where following that whole Hitler thing, society pushed itself towards extreme civility, perhaps to a greater extent then anywhere else. If more of the men of Cologne would have been anything like my father and armed with the communication technology of today, a large number of German Shepherds would have presented themselves on the scene and would have put an end to the fun of the hyenas in no time. It is true that in their primitive fashion, they would have probably mauled some of the ones on the scenes that were not at all hyenas, but just people having innocent fun, while their hyena friends were doing their not-so innocent thing. But primitive German Shepherd justice is by no means perfect, even if at times necessary as we are now learning (at least some of us) and highly effective.

Just as well! If there would have been enough German Shepherds to show up and do what evidently needed to be done that night, the headlines the next morning in the mainstream media would have been that a bunch of racist young men attacked a group of poor asylum seekers, who were just looking to celebrate their fortune of being far from conflict and showing their generous gratitude to the local host population. The authorities and media would have certainly not waited days as they did with reporting the assaults, until they realized that unlike other smaller incidents, there was no sweeping this one under the carpet. They finally realized that the gig is up and the more they try, the further they will erode their reputation. But, if they would have had that alternative story of the German Shepherds showing up, they would have called the next day for re-doubling the efforts to "educate" the people of Germany in regards to "tolerant behavior" and they would have called to further marginalize those who still have not learned that being a German Shepherd in today's society is not acceptable.

It seems that even those who are supposed to be the designated German Shepherds of our society, namely the police, are in fact no longer German Shepherds either, at least as far as Cologne is concerned. I watched a video of the event posted on line and to my surprise, did not see a single foot patrol walking through the crowds, at least to remind the partying hyenas once in a while to behave themselves, because the designated German Shepherds are on the job. No wonder then that as many as 90 victims have come forward so far, with many saying that the real number of victims is most likely higher, because as is the case in such situations, some are just ashamed to come forward.

We have become poodles under the non-written social contract with our elites that in exchange for us Western men giving up on our masculinity and becoming a bunch of docile intellectual caricatures, hanging out in pubs and coffee places, dressing in a manner that denies our heterosexuality just a little bit and act like it as well, in exchange for the authorities assuming the responsibility of keeping us safe. And the assumption is that they will do a good job of it. Today the people of Germany are learning that their elites have broken their side of the bargain. They introduced a large population, which includes a very large proportion of hyenas, by our standards. They did so, while pretending that the hyenas were not there. They went as far as hiding some of the early deeds of the hyenas last year, in order to continue pretending. And now, when the events in Cologne can no longer be denied as an indication of the fact that a large number of hyenas were unleashed on the docile German society, due to the misguided policies of the elites, they are still trying to whitewash it to some extent, by pretending that German society can in the future weed out the hyenas from the rest of the migrant population. In other words, no need to at the very least change policy, never mind admitting failure and resigning. It is as if the social contract does not exist, and the German Shepherds agreed to become puddles, without any implicit expectations in return.

But the poodles of Germany have to come to terms with the fact that their society did make this deal, whereby they will largely give up being German Shepherds. It is important to admit the existence of this social contract, because it is very important to admit that the contract has been broken. And if the contract is not re-constituted by the elites, it is necessary to either replace the current elites with a new one, which will be willing to meet the elite's side of the bargain, or alternatively the German puddles, in defiance of their elite's wishes, will have to dig very deep and see if there is still a German Shepherd somewhere in there. It may be in there, but it may take a long time to resurrect it, because generations of conditioning have buried it very deep. Beside's, at some point, there may simply not be enough German Shepherds to deal with all the hyenas.

Monday, December 14, 2015

They just don't get it. He said some of the most outrageous and unconventional things. It was universally condemned by the political, media and intellectual elites across the board, from left to right and from right to left. And yet, the sheep are not responding. In fact even more of them are now following him. It seems as if the further he gets from what they see in the mirror every morning, the more popular he becomes. How can Donald Trump pull this off? Is he a political genius? Is it magic? Are the people not listening? Or perhaps the people are increasingly giving up on our entire elite strata, due to their failures?

Economic failure.

By far, the biggest failure of our western elites, which also has to a large degree to do with its social failure, is the failure to properly manage the long-term health of our economy. That may seem like a puzzling statement to make if one is to only look at living standards. To be sure, if we are to go by the HDI index or by GDP/capita rankings, we see that Western societies tend to dominate the top spots. Having said that, there are many indicators which confirm that average living standards in the Western world are in relative decline. For instance, in the US, we have the declining median household income situation.

As we can see, real median household incomes are now very far from the 1999 peak, which essentially means that we are very far away from living standards American households achieved in that year. Other measures such as food stamp recipients and so on confirm the fact that things are not as great as they used to be. We are in decline and people feel it. The effect may have been partially offset by lower interest rates which seem to be destined to remain near record lows, regardless of this month's decision to raise rates for the first time in almost a decade.

Things in Europe are not looking better. Europe's economy has been essentially flat since 2007. In other words, in real terms it remained the same size. The end result is an increase in poverty, as well as a bleak situation faced by the continent's youth. The high unemployment rate, which is double that in the US says it all.

Even in countries where the unemployment rate is low, such as in Germany, there is an increase in poverty. In fact, poverty levels are now highest since reunification two and a half decades ago.

Social failure.

On this front, the biggest failure is in Europe, because of the nature of European society, which I will touch on in another article. North American society to a large degree sees itself as an offshoot of Europe. But it is an offshoot made up of a mix of diverse European cultures and traditions. If one talks to people of European descent in North America about their background, it is usually an answer that goes along the lines of; "My mother came from Italy and my father is a mix of Germans who came three generations ago and Polish." So, if asked "is it is alright to have a large influx of people coming from Asia, Africa and Middle East?" the response will be largely that it has to be, after all, "my ancestors are immigrants to this place as well." Sometimes people will express some concern in private conversations in regards to their country losing its European offshoot characteristics. Some will even wander whether it is wise to relinquish our majority population status, given that we don't know exactly how our children and grandchildren will be treated within such circumstances. In some private conversations I have had with people who lived at some point in Vancouver for instance, where about half the population is of Asian descent, discrimination by groups of large Asian population clusters against all others was an issue often raised. People tend to shy away from talking about it in a more public setting, because any such issues being raised, most often leads to accusations of racism by the PC police. What we are seeing now with the rise of Donald Trump seems to be a revolt against the PC autocracy, which has been extremely vicious, with people who are accused of racism, often being stigmatized, or even losing their jobs.

Of course, if one listens to the mainstream media "analysis", they will offer us explanations along the lines "Trump is tapping into underlying racism, prejudice, which still exists within our society." The fact that both establishment parties in the US failed and the people who are increasingly impacted by it never ever comes up, of course.

Let us look at the whole concept of illegal immigration. Much of it is rooted in the long-term strategy to make food as cheap as possible, in order to free up consumer demand for other products. Thus the family farms, which once upon a time produced quality produce for the rest of us to enjoy, while giving families a chance to scratch a middle class existence out of the dirt were replaced with the large factory farms. Those who gave up their farms in the process, moved to the city, so there was a need to get replacements. This is why illegal immigration was tolerated from the start. After all, can we really imagine those California vegetable farms surviving without the illegal migrants? Ignoring the laws of the state is extreme, yet this is what the solution provided by our elites has been. Yet, they now wonder why there is a shift to the other extreme, because of course, they do not see themselves as extreme, but widely accepted mainstream. They have been making it work for many decades.

Encouraging consumer demand is also responsible for the increased demand for foreign high-skill imports. Most of us who finished university or even high school in the past few decades know that most kids work part-time while in school. That is in order to be able to afford certain things that make the North American teenage and undergrad experience fun, or at least tolerable, such as having a car, some decent clothes and a little bit of beer money, which our parents would be hard-pressed to provide us with. We have been shown in countless movies for many decades, that this is what we have to do and most of us do it. Of course, there are many who also do it, because they really have no other choice, due to financial circumstances. I believe there is a growing rank of young people who belong in that category. We made great consumers in the process, which is very important to our consumer-driven economy. Unfortunately, many of us will fail to reach our academic potential, due to the demands on our time, which are excessive, given the need and desire to work while in school.

But, once again, we are told by out elites that there is a solution, and the good news is that it fits within the currently accepted ideological framework. We can import our mid-level elites. The focus is currently on getting PhD's and students mainly from Asia, which is now North America's largest source of migrant inflow. We are told that it is good for the economy, therefore good for us. These people are smart and they will contribute to innovation as well as to the better functioning of every aspect of our society. But this too is an extreme solution, because it automatically suggests that most of us can forget about our own children achieving mid-level elite status. It is increasingly not just the large inflow of well-educated migrants mainly from Asia, which provides the North American labor force with a disproportionate source of professional elites. Their children are helped by the fact that they have a lower divorce rate and their parents, many of which are already professional elites make great sacrifices for their children when it comes to their education, which is all very admirable (link). There is also the one aspect that is never talked about, namely the fact that Asian ethnic groups display a much higher degree of group competition on the job market. In other words, they are very likely to favor their own kind when in a position to do so.

There are no studies on this of course, nor should we ever expect such studies to appear. I have seen a few instances myself and I have had a few conversations with people who witnessed a similar thing happen. For instance someone once told me of a Chinese member of a hiring committee, who picked out all the fellow Chinese resumes as potential candidates, excluding all others. This should not come as a surprise, because we should remember that people from different cultures come with different values. We cannot expect a Chinese person educated in China for instance to have been exposed to the same level of education in regards to the unethical aspects of ethnicity-based discrimination. This tends to be an exclusively Western trend as far as I am aware. Furthermore, different cultures may have stronger ethnic kinship bonds than others.

So, in effect, our elites are failing to provide with adequate educational resources for those who were born here and parents are not encouraged to invest in their children's education, but to consume. Children grow up learning from society that focus on education should be shared with focusing on obtaining money in order to become a good consumer. In other words, we are encouraged to get a job in order to be able to afford to live the American teenage and perhaps undergrad dream of having lots of fun, even if our parents who are increasingly struggling to make ends meet, cannot afford to help us in that goal. We are asked to trade in our children's futures for marginally lower taxes, which leads to less spending on education. Hollywood-promoted social engineering discourages our children from focusing on educational achievements, in favor of pouring our energy and resources into engaging in cheap consumerism. And of course, even those who do otherwise and do achieve a higher level of education, are increasingly faced with affirmative action programs, in other words, legal discrimination or as is lately the case, faced with groups of people who compete on the job market as an ethnic collective,which might have not been a problem a few decades ago, but now with the number of people belonging to a visible ethnic minority within the strata of professional elites becoming ever-more present or even dominant in some fields, one is likely to encounter such discriminatory situations whether we are aware of it or not.

It is no wonder then that America, long known as the land of opportunity, now happens to be one of the countries with the lowest levels of social mobility in the developed world.

With the promise of a decent future for themselves and their children increasingly ringing hollow and a feeling of marginalization in favor of importing elites from abroad, it is no wonder then that the mainstream center elite no longer attracts an increasing number of people. A few attempts to link support for Donald Trump and his ideas with a low level of education & income were made in the recent past.

In other words, Trump appeals to the low end, to the dumb ones, who don't know any better but to share in his populist bigotry and fear mongering against non-white foreigners. In fact, support for Trump comes mainly from the increasing ranks of white people who are not making it. These numbers will only increase and it will not only be those who are not making it, but those close to them who will increasingly find that Trump's message appeals to them. After all, we all sympathize with our siblings, children, parents, cousins and so on. It is is because the current elites are failing these people that Trump is increasingly popular. And even if they will band together and join forces on the left and the right in order to defeat him as the French elites recently did in France's regional elections, in order to deny the right-wing FN regional gains, it will not be the end of it. Fact is that what the current elites have to offer in terms of ideas and ideology are not cutting it for an increasing number of people. They feel that the system and the leaders they have been electing are failing them, so they look for someone else.

Friday, November 13, 2015

While I never attended the prestigious Yale university I want to congratulate the Yale staff and students for the principled stand they took against the practice of wearing costumes on Halloween, which may offend some people. This really is the right path, because Halloween should be a happy occasion where everyone should feel comfortable with other people's behavior and choices.

Have to say however that as a person born in Transylvania, I am a little bit disappointed in the fact that no attention was given to costumes which us Transylvanians, some of which may be a little bit over-sensitive, may find to be potentially offensive. You were wise to suggest that people should not impersonate Native Americans, Muslims or anyone of color, but remember that other people have feelings as well.

Now, before you jump to conclusions and think that this may be a joke, I assure you, it is not! Transylvania is a real place, currently within the country of Romania. Transylvania has about seven million inhabitants, therefore chances are that Yale university, with over 12,000 students enrolled and many staff members as well, is home to at least a few people of Transylvanian heritage.

Now, us Transylvanians are somewhat more reserved people comparatively speaking. We would not ordinarily make a big fuss about some people portraying us in a negative light during an event such as Halloween, therefore perhaps none of your Transylvanian students spoke up about it, or it may simply be that none of them are offended. But should we take a chance on offending anyone? Or would it be wise to take proper precautions?

Thanks to Bram Stoker who did not manage to get his geography right, us poor Transylvanians are stuck with being associated with this cultural event. They even made a terrible movie called "Zoltan hound of Dracula", which unfortunately attributes my name, which I am proud of, to an evil murderous dog. When I first saw the movie and saw just how awful it was, I was hoping that people will not associate my name with it, because most people would have never even seen it, but it was not to be. I in fact was approached a few times by people inquiring about that awful connection, and related to me that that awful movie is in fact a cult classic. So I urge you, please add vampires to your list of costumes which may be offensive to others. Who knows, it may even save a poor Transylvanian's life. These days, one never knows given all the unbalanced people around us, whether we will one day have an impalement of a Transylvanian into the heart with a wooden stake. If this is not about making people feel safe, I don't know what is!

Furthermore, given that us Transylvanians come from Central Europe, I also recommend that you consider putting on your list werewolf and Frankenstein monster costumes which are inspired by that region as well. Again. it is not only a matter of offending Central European cultures by portraying them as belonging to a place that produces all sorts of horrible monsters, but it is a matter of safety. Transylvanians and other Central Europeans could become the target of a deranged person which may be convinced that a Central European person may turn into a werewolf thus he/she may look to kill that person with a silver bullet.

Looking back at a particular incident that happened about a decade ago in a gay club, I am also inclined to believe that these sort of stereotypes about the region where I come from, may even lead to sexual harassment issues, sparked by misunderstandings. Me and a Hungarian friend of mine escorted a group of young ladies to that club after their bachelorette party ended early (stripper left and they started tugging on my shirt when I got there to deliver the drunk groom-to-be to his home). This club was open till later than most, so we went there. It did not take long for my Hungarian friend's tush to be grabbed by another man and for my friend to want to go home as a result. All these years I thought that it was merely a case of a gay man taking a liking to my friends rear end, which he obviously must have thought is rather cute and attractive. Now that I think back, he must have heard us speak in Hungarian, he must have seen my friend's face and probably thought that he is tired, and he must have thought we might be formerly dead people brought back to life in traditional Central European fashion, by some evil scientist. So, perhaps he figured that my friend who must have looked very tired must need an electric charge and that nice gay person must have simply been looking for a place to plug it in. So, as you can see, promoting the Frankenstein monster image on Halloween can in fact lead to some potentially unpleasant misunderstandings.

As for the Witch costume, my grandmother used to practice some of those ceremonies which are usually associated with witchcraft. Honestly, I don't really think those ceremonies worked. But, it is estimated that about half a million women in Europe were burnt at the stake over those Pagan rituals, therefore is it really wise not to discourage the use of that costume? After all, it gives legitimacy to one of the most horrific crimes against women in human history. Not to mention that it misrepresents my late grandmother, which I can assure you that even though she practiced some of those rituals, she did not dress like that, nor did she ever attempt to fly on a broom.

I know that it may seem highly unusual for anyone from my part of the world to ask for such considerations, given that we are more reserved when it comes to such issues, as I already pointed out. But, given that you have gone to such effort to protect other groups such as Native Americans, Muslims and colored people in general from being offended by Halloween costumes that some thoughtless people may decide to wear for the occasion, I implore you to also consider extending the same courtesy to us Transylvanians, for we are truly the most affected cultural group on Halloween.

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

If we think back to Ukraine's Maidan revolution back in 2013, the Western Media and many political elites jumped on the notion that Yanukovic was facing opposition to his turn towards Russia from the majority of the population. It was unclear whether or not that was true at the time, but the media presented the protests as the will of the people, therefore deposing of a democratically elected president through street protests was presented to us as fair and democratic.

In the case of the highly polarized debate on the immigration crisis, we cannot be certain whether or not the majority of Europe's population was in favor of today's particular decision on mandatory migrant quotas. Fact is that we will not see much mainstream media reference to the will of the EU population, even though there are clear signs of widespread popular dissent. We will hear over and over again how the majority vote at EU level defeated the opposition put up by four former communist countries to these quotas. EU public opinion will unfortunately be ignored not only by the EU political elite, but also by the Western mainstream media. They will present this as a case of West Europeans being mainly in favor of facilitating the enlargement of the EU's capacity to take in asylum seekers, against the East, where people are mainly opposed.

The fact that Britain, Ireland and Denmark, all three of which are west European countries were more than happy to exercise their right not to participate in the scheme, will largely be ignored when creating this narrative of the East-West divide. Nor will the media focus much on the fact that the French government most likely acted against the majority will of the French electorate, given that 55% of people polled in that country were against taking in more asylum seekers. France will take in the second largest number of asylum seekers under this scheme. French President Francois Hollande publicly declared that his electorate's opposition does not matter.

In Belgium, 61% of people think that there are too many migrants being taken in, yet Belgium voted for the mandatory quota. There are many other West European countries where the vote of the elite ran counter to majority public opinion on this very important issue. There were also East European member states, such as Poland, where the population is opposed to the quota, yet its government decided to vote for it.

We may not have an entirely clear EU public opinion picture on the specific issue of the mandatory migrant quota, but we do know that a 57% majority of all EU citizens were against taking in migrants from countries outside the EU, according to the European commission's own survey conducted this year.

So in effect the European Parliament & the European Commission both went against the wishes of the EU electorate, because the mandatory quota plan is meant to expand Europe's capacity to take in migrants.

Now, if the EU masses will chose to take to the streets over this issue and demand a reversal of course, or call for their elites who ignored their will to resign, will the EU elite act in a democratic manner and abide by the will of the masses? Will they allow for early elections over the issue as Yanukovic offered to do before he was forced to flee? Fact is that at this point, the EU elites are looking like they will get away with their outright disrespectful act of disregard for their electorate. This may be in part because the European people do not feel as strongly about this issue as Ukrainians did about their choice between East & West. Or perhaps it will be the case because on this issue, there will be no Nuland action to hand out "cookies" in support of the protests, in other words, there will be no special interest supporting the organization of a protest movement. Political parties which are opposed to accepting this migrant flow into the EU are simply not strong enough to motivate enough people to devote their time and energy to the cause of preventing the EU elites from imposing their will on the masses.

Most importantly, the EU elites will rely heavily on the mainstream Western media to steer the conversation on this topic away from the most important aspect of it, namely the extent to which the elites are out of step compared to their electorate on this issue. The conversation will be channeled towards many other directions, making it seem like the topic is being covered fairly and objectively to some extent. The Western mainstream media can successfully do this, because it does have many decades of built-up credibility on its side. That credibility is slowly eroding in my opinion, but right now, it still wields tremendous power and influence with the masses. The EU elites also have a very strong and active left-leaning globalist minority of people in Europe who feel very passionate about open borders and the right of anyone to chose where they live on this planet. This minority has shown in past weeks a much stronger will to publicly support their view. Those opposed to the concept of taking in all eligible asylum seekers who simply show up in Europe seem to be content with expressing their disapproval at election time, forgetting that elections will be contested based on many other topics, which will peel away the majority that feels shunned by the EU elites on the topic, leaving a minority of voters who will still feel the need to hold their elites accountable for this.

We often hear of autocratic governments where the leadership is portrayed to be ruling with an iron grip on the levers of power, with disregard for their citizens. Some leaders that fit in this category in the present and in the recent past have been deposed by popular movements, such as the color revolutions in Eastern Europe. Ironically, it seems that it is precisely the leadership which we perceive as being more democratic, which seems to be able to show the middle finger to its electorate on many subjects, including this one and still get away with it. Makes one think who really holds the reigns of power with an iron grip?

Friday, September 18, 2015

The current migrant inflow into Europe is starting to severely affect its institutions that are core to EU economic activity such as the Schengen agreement on free movement across borders.

Data from the past few months from the border of Hungary suggests that the migrant inflow continues to grow exponentially. It was 10,000/month at beginning of year, while 100,000/month now.

The only proposed solution, on which EU members haggled for months and continue to do so is un-viable and counterproductive. The time already lost makes odds of crisis resolution unlikely.

One of the most important pillars of the current global world order is the European Union. It is the purpose for the very existence of the NATO alliance. It is occasionally the world's largest economy, depending on the Euro/Dollar exchange rate. EU member states also collectively make up the largest exporter/importer of goods in the world. It is an important pillar in the global advancement of science, technological innovation, and very importantly, human rights standards.

Europe has also become the most unstable pillar of the current world order. It has been plagued by slow economic growth for some time now. In fact, since 2008 the EU economy has registered average yearly economic growth near zero percent. This has resulted in a great deal of disillusionment with the EU experiment among wide segments of its citizenry, which is being manifested in a great wave of increasing support for radical political movements on the left and right side of the spectrum. In some cases, formerly mainstream political parties had to resort to borrowing the radical positions of the rising fringe parties in order to remain in power. If we can draw a parallel to the historical past, I'd have to say that we are looking at a similar trend as we saw in the aftermath of the 1929 economic crash, where in Germany for instance, the centrist political forces were abandoned in favor of the National Socialists and the Communists.

In addition to the economic crisis that the old continent is facing, a series of unexplainable and seemingly illogical policy decisions have further dampened Europe's chances of recovering. The 2014 economical and political confrontation with Russia comes to mind as a very obvious example. There were plenty of opportunities to prevent the conflict, including the day after Ukraine's president Yanukovic was deposed. On that day, the new Ukrainian government decided to do away with the country's minority rights, which inflamed the spirits among the Russian minority, and in my view did more than anything to spark the civil war. The EU should have acted swiftly to condemn that act as soon as it learned of it. It could have prevented the civil war and might have even denied Putin the opportunity to annex Crimea. But as things stand right now, the EU probably lost hundreds of thousands of jobs as a result of the economic confrontation with Russia and shaved a few tenths of a percent from its economic growth potential. It was the last thing the EU needed after almost a decade of economic stagnation.

Now we are looking at a new crisis that threatens the stability of the old continent. This time, it is causing not only economic distress, but is also leading to an ideological and regional polarization that threatens the stability of the EU. At the root of this problem is yet another mistake made by some EU member states in regards to the handling of the refugee crisis. Countries like Sweden and Germany increasingly signaled a willingness to offer asylum to anyone who shows up and makes a convincing claim to be from a conflict zone. Last year, there were hundreds of thousands who risked the Mediterranean voyage on flimsy, overcrowded boats run by people smugglers in order to take advantage of the opportunity. This year, we are looking at perhaps a million and a half people doing this. Let us not forget that this number does not represent the actual number of people who will receive asylum. On one hand, there will be some rejections, but on the other hand there will be family unification for those who are accepted. Taking this into consideration, the actual number of asylum seekers being accepted ends up being much higher.

A million and a half people and then relatives who will follow may be overwhelming for the EU right now, but the trends we are seeing at the Hungarian border for instance are worrying to say the least. At the beginning of the year, there were about 10,000 asylum seekers entering Hungary each month. By last month however, that figure increased to 50,000 and this month it seems that there are about 3-4,000 new arrivals each day on average, which means that there will be over 100,000 new asylum seekers crossing into Hungary this month. It remains to be seen whether more stringent measures will help stem the flow into Hungary, but even if it will, fact is that the route will simply move to another country such as Croatia. After Hungary closed the border and hunkered down behind its newly-built fence, Croatia saw a massive one-day influx of over 5,000 asylum seekers enter in just one day.

Given the German and Swedish policy of considering anyone who shows up from a conflict zone or from a country where they can show that they are facing political repression for asylum and permanent residence, there is literally no practical limit to the potential supply of asylum seekers seeking to move to Europe. Conflict zones in the Middle East alone, such as Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Afghanistan collectively comprise a population of over 100 million people. Add to that the many conflict areas in Africa as well as repressive regimes around the world and we have hundreds of millions of people on this planet who are eligible for asylum in Europe, by only showing up. I by no means mean to suggest that hundreds of millions of people will show up, but a growing number are making the journey.

Add to that a growing trend of people assuming a false identity in order to be able to claim asylum under the pretext of being from a conflict zone and there really is no limit to the potential flow of refugees. There have been reports that there is a flourishing trade in Turkey in fake Syrian passports. The Syrian government is also getting in on this by issuing Syrian passportsat various embassies for about $400, with no need to show proof of identity. It has been reported that 10,000 such passports were issued at their Jordanian embassy alone, with similar situations reported elsewhere, such as in Lebanon. There are even those who show up with no identification papers at all. There are many reports of people being caught at the Hungarian border with Serbia, which claim to be from a conflict country, while in fact they came from countries neighboring the conflict zone, such as Pakistani citizens posing as Afghans. Many are not caught however and there is no way to catch them, unless they give themselves away by mistake.

Let us also remember that aiding in this whole process, we also have the people-smuggling networks, which are becoming a billion dollar industry. There is money to be made in the process of facilitating this mass-movement of people across seas and borders. It has been reported that in Hungary alone over 1,000 suspected people smugglers were detained this year. Bottom line, there is an almost limitless pool of potential asylum seekers and the criminal networks to get them to Europe are also firmly in place and growing. Any further invitation to come will result in the tide of refugees rising even higher. Yet, as I shall explain, an invitation for more to come is exactly the proposed solution, in the form of mandatory migrant quotas.

Needless to say that countries like Germany are now feeling overwhelmed by their commitments to take in all those who come, now that the world has heard their message. The proposed solution has therefore become the EU migrant quota scheme, which does very little to prevent this tide from rising. It is however a wrong-headed approach, which is leading to a lot of bad blood across the EU.

In France, for instance, 55% of people oppose taking in asylum seekers, yet their government has taken a lead role alongside Germany in attempting to push for a compulsory system of asylum seeker accommodation among EU members. Needles to say that this is causing a lot of friction given that we have countries such as the Czech Republic, where 94% of people in a recent poll supported the idea of the EU returning all asylum seekers to where they came from. The overall mood of the EU electorate seems to be decidedly opposed to taking in immigrants from outside the EU as a European Commision survey has found. According to the findings, 57% of Europeans are opposed to taking in migrants from outside the EU, while only 34% are in favor of the idea.

The resulting friction caused by an EU population that is largely opposed to taking in the asylum seekers, not supporting some of the EU elites who want to impose a mandatory, permanent quota, while doing little to address the flow of immigrants is already leading to indecision which is tearing EU institutions apart. The mainly EU-based Schengen zone, which allows people and goods to travel through most of Europe without border controls is crumbling as more and more states are putting up border controls. This cannot happen without serious economic consequences. For instance, the Hungarian border with Austria and Slovakia, both of which are now being reinstated is facilitating about $100 billion in yearly two-way trade between Hungary and the EU. Trade between Romania and Bulgaria on one hand and the rest of the EU on the other is also facilitated mainly through those same borders. All the borders that are currently temporarily re-introduced across Europe facilitate a few trillion Euro's worth of trade between EU nations. 62% of all trade done by EU countries is within the European Union. Most of that trade will still continue at an extra cost, but some of it will cease.

While the potential loss of the free movement of goods is a current problem with grave consequences for the already fragile EU economy, it pales in comparison to the problems it is causing politically. There is increasing acrimony among member countries over the mandatory quota plan, with threats flying over some former communist countries refusing to accept their share. Austria's Chancellor, as well as Germany's interior minister suggested that former communist countries should be pressured into voting in favor of the permanent quota system by cutting EU funds to these countries. Needless to say that there was a very angry response to such coercive and legally questionable ideas being expressed by the German government and Austria's leader. For now Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel brushed aside such statements, suggesting that it is not helpful to make threats, but it certainly highlights the level of friction that this is causing.

The UK situation is also being aggravated by the current crisis. It is likely to hold a referendum on EU membership in 2017 and this crisis and its handling is pushing British public opinion towards the "Brexit" camp. This would mean far fewer net resources for the EU, given that Britain is a significant net contributor to the central EU budget. This comes just as the EU is engaging in increased spending on asylum seekers, which means that cuts to popular EU-funded programs, such as infrastructure projects will happen, and will further alienate the EU electorate.

Aside from the British referendum, we also have a number of national elections coming up, where anti-EU governments have a strong chance of coming to power. Most notably, we have the French presidential elections in 2017, where the formerly fringe National Front party has a real chance of capturing the presidency with Marine La Pen polling ahead of her rivals. Even in Sweden, where the overwhelming majority of the population was in favor of offering asylum to all who show up from places like Syria, the formerly fringe, anti-immigration Sweden Democrats are leading in the opinion polls. An increase in violence and crime in Swedish towns like Malmo, where immigrants make up an ever-larger share of the population is causing the electorate to turn away from its traditionally moderate views.

There is also an aspect of this situation which most Western mainstream media outlets as well as European officials have been ignoring. While all attention has been on the refusal of many countries to accept mandatory permanent migrant quotas, there is also the prevailing opinion of the migrants to consider. I have the benefit of being fluent in both Hungarian and Romanian, therefore I can access news from local sources. Hungary's government has been pointing out for months that none of the 200,000 asylum seekers who entered Hungary want to actually stay in Hungary. They want to go to Western Europe, where living standards are higher and social benefits more generous.

The media and EU officials seem to have dismissed these reports coming out of Hungary, preferring to accuse that country of not providing the asylum seekers with adequate shelter and other help, rather than admit to the fact that their entire argument that these are not refugees but mainly economic migrants is flawed to say the least. The fact that asylum seekers in Hungary refused attempts to house them in camps and be registered in accordance with laws governing members of the EU and Schengen area, was simply dismissed as a refusal by refugees to collaborate with authorities that were accused of not treating the asylum seekers well enough (which is partly true). At the same time however, only after two days of Hungary closing its borders, diverting the flow of migrants towards Croatia, we are already seeing violent and chaotic situations emerge in that country as well. I think, it puts into perspective the lack of objectivity that the Western media as well as EU officials used in their attacks on the Hungarian authorities in the past few months.

In Romania however, where thus far there has been no influx of refugees, the true picture of the situation was uncovered by the Romanian media. As the debate over migrant quotas was raging in the EU, it was revealed that roughly 6-7,000 migrants may be sent to Romania as part of the first quota allocation. Some Romanian journalists from Adevarul (Article is in Romanian) got the bright idea to go to Hungary and talk to some of the asylum seekers in places like Budapest and asked them what they thought of the prospect of being sent to Romania. All the respondents refused the concept outright, all of them citing the fact that they heard Romania is a "poor" country, therefore they are not interested. So, clearly, the overwhelming majority of the asylum seekers are motivated by economic considerations when showing up in the EU, therefore the whole quota system is flawed and likely to create more problems.

I cannot think of a more explosive situation than forcing potentially hundreds of thousands of migrants to locate to countries in the former communist block, where they do not want to be, surrounded by locals who overwhelmingly do not want them there either. In Hungary, they went as far as breaching the camps in order to avoid being subjected to the quota. They all declared themselves for Germany or other Western countries. They resisted any attempts by Hungarian authorities to enforce the laws that bind it as a member of the EU, thus not respecting the laws of the EU, where they wish to claim refugee status. I do not see any positive prospects for hundreds of thousands of these migrants, which will be allocated to the former communist block in the next year or so if the quota system is approved, to simply accept their fate peacefully. They would if they were simply refugees trying to find shelter from violence as most of the Western elite tried to portray them. While many of the asylum seekers are indeed from conflict zones, they are clearly dual-purpose migrants and by the time they reach Europe, they are no longer fleeing war. Ignoring this very important fact cost the EU months of haggling over the quota system, which does not resolve the problem, only intensifies it in the longer term.

The quota system will intensify the problem by sending out the message to potential asylum seekers that Europe has found a mechanism to deal with ever-increasing volumes of migrants, which means that they are less likely to be rejected when showing up. In effect, it will not only be Germany and Sweden inviting them, but the entire EU. The already exponentially-growing flow of refugees will intensify further, overwhelming Europe's ability to cope. That is exactly why Britain's Prime Minister announced that his country will take in 20,000 Syrian refugees, but not from among the asylum seekers who showed up in Europe, but from camps in the Middle East. It is a measure that is not only logical but also humane, given that the ones taking refuge in places like Lebanon are the ones in most need, given that they cannot afford to pay the people smugglers to get them to Europe. A few EU leaders recognize the danger of continuing to offer asylum to all who show up with a valid claim, but unfortunately the EU leadership as well as leaders of many EU countries are choosing to take an ideological rather than a logical position.

Given the political deadlock, as well as the fact that the only proposed solution on the table is deeply flawed for the many reasons I pointed out, this crisis will not only continue, but intensify. EU elites have been very slow to realize that the overland migration route through the Balkans, which started to grow in prominence late last year and is now eclipsing the previously popular Mediterranean route. It already has the potential to bring to the borders of the EU hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers each month. The EU is not prepared to deal with it politically or institutionally. European public opinion puts it at odds with the EU elite, while opposition from some EU countries to taking in refugees through a permanent mandatory quota is causing friction among member states. Now we have border controls re-introduced among member states, being announced on a daily basis. The economic impact that it will have depends on the severity of the border controls, but as of this week, we are now looking at a resulting economic impact, which is set to grow exponentially together with the crisis.

If nothing is done to stop the crisis and the resulting acrimony, as well as the resulting disruptions to the institutions that the EU economy depends on, we could start to see the return of recession in the EU next year, or even sooner. If the quota system will be adopted, it might lead to a return to a semblance of normal life in the EU for a few months, but I expect that it will ultimately lead to an even more severe social, political and economic crisis breaking out within a few months, or within a year at the most, depending on how fast the flow of refugees will continue to intensify. At that point, we will likely become spectators to an EU crisis that will make the Greek "tragedy" look very tame in comparison.

About Me

Author of book "Sustainable Trade". Book's central subject is a proposal for the elimination of all current bilateral, and multilateral trade agreements, in favor of a new tariff system meant to encourage sustainability. Double honors degree in History and Anthropology, and a B.A in Economics.